When Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State, sat before the Senate Foreign Relation Committee hearing on the Benghazi attacks, her conviction on the matter was certainly not in question. The questions came hard and fast and her answers escalated in kind with frustration. Eerily similar to famous exchange at the climax of the movie A Few Good Men when the “You can’t handle the truth” line was delivered, when questioned repeatedly regarding the misinformation that was delivered to the public via both Susan Rice, ambassador to the UN and the White House, she finally delivered the soon-to-be-infamous line “What difference, at this point, does it make!”

I have no argument with the premise that emotionally charged and pointed questions with the goal of her to admit failure are pointless, but the difference that it makes is this: if during the execution and aftermath, the event was so blatantly blamed on inconclusive and arguably concocted evidence (i.e., a “protest turned violent over a YouTube video, instead of a coordinated terrorist attack) to the point the President actually took that defense to the UN himself —what is it that they were hiding? She’s right, Benghazi was a mess. She admitted and took responsibility for the security and adopted all twenty-nine measures recommended by the investigation, but the clover and clean up—that is the problem.

How is it that the same administration that had a play-by-play seat in the world’s most sophisticated war room during the Bin Laden raid couldn’t review simple surveillance camera feeds and figure out what happened weeks later? The White House made this Benghazi-gate, not the Republicans, by the way they handled it. The American people simply do not like being lied to—it is a matter of trust—and it’s a big one. This is notably not the first time Hillary Clinton has had to cover for a man in the White House who is not being truthful, and understandably, she’s getting a little tired of it. So are we, Madam Secretary—so are we.